Let's turn it around for a second:
Does TD have the largest concentration of elitist urban metrosexuals on the web?
If there is a bigger concentration of elitist urban metrosexuals, then I haven't seen it
Finally, I'm going to throw this out here: Article goes in depth US MIL Data
The military also tracks statistics regarding its forces. In 2010, the available pool of 18-24 years old enlistees was 29,004,915 and the number of actual recruits was 156,289 - just .005% (half of one percent).
Additionally, they calculate the numbers of recruits coming from the various states in terms of the number available in relationship to the number of recruits actually provided.
For example: The state pulling the most weight compared to the others was Florida (+2.30%) by providing 7.50% of military recruits even though they have available only 5.20% of the nation’s 18 to 24 year olds. <snip>
The state puling the least weight compared to the others was - wait for it - New York. NY had 6.6% of the nations’ available 18 to 24 year olds but provided only 4.10% of the nation’s recruits for a net contribution of minus -2.5%. New York is not contributing its ‘fair share’.
NORTHEAST REGION had 18.2% of the available pool of recruits but provided only 12.7% of recruits giving a contribution number of –5.5%.
NORTH CENTRAL REGION had 23.3% of the available pool of recruits but provided only 20.2% of recruits giving a contribution number of –2.1%.
SOUTH REGION had 35.8% of the available pool of recruits but provided only 43.4% of recruits giving a contribution number of +7.6%.
WEST REGION had 23.7% of the available pool of recruits but provided only 23.6% of recruits giving a contribution number of -.1%. (This group would have been a net positive contribution region but for the presence of California’s minus 1.6%.)
Conclusion: southerners, largely rural, make up a significant portion of the US armed forces, followed closely by westerners from largely rural states. If you get more granular, you'll see that those same groups make up the majority of the combat arms. The guys who actually carry the guns and do the dirty work. In all of our names.
I don't know about you, but if the chips are down, I'd much rather be friends with 'under educated rural people' than enemies.
They've got the guns, they've got old world know how (like repair, build, grow), and they have the highest number of .mil veterans, per capita.
Rural people tend to be more independent, less dependent on the state, and I find that small towns have much higher social trust levels than suburbs or cities.
For example, I can shoot guns in my yard, ride a dirt bike in my field and woods, let my dogs run, free range chickens, have a bonfire, grow a garden, not mow my grass for 3 weeks, and even (gasp) keep an old truck in my driveway without getting a ration of shite from my neighbors, the non-existent HOA, or the local LEOs.
Plus, my neighbors are all armed. That's lagniappe IMO.
Every group has its pluses and minuses and we all have the freedom to live where we choose.
Now, your post sucks and IDGAF if this is too long for 95% of the people on this thread, because, being the educated urban sophisticate that you are, you will have sufficient attention span and command of the English language to both read the attached references, and to distill a coherent picture that makes your original post look as asinine as it should.